The three of them were disappointed with the training these DJs had. All radio folk should have training in what is legal/appropriate and what isn't. These training sessions might not be taken seriously by everyone, but it's up to the DJ or the journalist to take the codes seriously. It would seem the management of the station hasn't made clear what the responsibilities of the DJs were, nor explained the relevant laws. It would seem they didn't know themselves!

I watched the interview with the DJs, and I got the impression they weren't being completely frank. Their answers to questions about the process in their radio station for clearing or rejecting material were evasive (I thought) and unconvincing. I think it's almost incredible that they didn't know! They also totally failed to answer some of the other (only mildly probing) questions put to them. I got the impression they'd been (badly) coached about what they should and shouldn't say. That's a pity because it slightly undermined the sincerity of their regret about what had happened.

Both of your comments on the issue are truly, well stated. I am totally appalled how "ethics" are thrown out the window, in the name of ratings. Likewise, I think it is time to allow the Duchess of Cambridge the dignity and privacy she deserves during her pregnancy.

I can't call it good news but at least the radio station has some sense of responsibility. They're donating all the income from any advertising during the rest of the year to ''an appropriate memorial fund'' that will ''directly benefit the family of Jacintha Saldanha''.

I'm not totally sure what percentage withdrew their advertising but some major ones did. The ads start back today. They still expect to make at least half a million dollars though and have promised a ''minimum contribution of $500,000 will be made''. If it doesn't happen then there will be outrage here as well as everywhere else. I'm sure they've gone through their accounts and worked out what they can afford to give without making any rash promises. At least I hope so!

Edited to add that this particular station has seen enough controversy. They were only getting over last year's debacle when this happened, and staff morale is reported to be low. I can't see them not paying up. They need to in order to restore some dignity and self respect.

Edited by Tizzabelle (Tue Dec 11 201201:34 PM)

_________________________
A platypus lays eggs and produces milk - it can make its own custard

I believe that Kate's pregnancy was announced early, in the hope that it would stop the press hounding her to know why she was in hospital. I wonder if it made things worse. She may now qualify as public property, but not everything she does needs to be.

_________________________
I appreciate people who are civil, whether they mean it or not. I think: Be civil. Do not cherish your opinion over my feelings. There's a vanity to candor that isn't really worth it. Be kind. ~ Richard Greenberg

First, to begin with the prank. I personally don’t care how you justify it—the whole thing was in poor taste. I’ve learned from my mother, who works in health care, a lot more about confidentiality and HIPPA laws than I did from my studies in college (on Social Work and Human Services, so everything overlapped). Ethics violations are very serious indeed, and it’s amazing to me how people just don’t think. True, pranks have been around for years—but there are certain pranks that should never even be entertained. Those that involve calling hospitals or similar facilities are on the top of the list. Such behavior was simply inexcusable.

To be fair, the staff or workers at the hospital were obviously uninformed, or underinformed… and that sort of thing is also inexcusable.

No one thing led to this catastrophe. Every situation is a combination of smaller situations, or events, or however you want to put it. Perhaps, instead of pinning the blame on just a few individuals, it should be shared equally – and, if not, there shouldn’t be any finger pointing at all.

My heart is with all those effected by the tragedy, and I withhold judgment—or, at least, try. Whatever opinions I have are just that, opinions—and, you could even say, value judgments—but the fact is I wasn’t there. And not being a part of the situation makes it imperative that I not come down on anyone. Even so, as I said, I make value judgments, for the situation screams “ethics violation” and “poor taste.”

One more note: all the legal nonsense is just… unbelievable. These people should be *ashamed of themselves!

“All radio folk should have training in what is legal/appropriate and what isn't.”Exactly.

Jazmee27 these nurses thought they were talking to the queen, they would have been flustered, rather like nurses in a similar situation in the US if they thought that they were unexpectedly talking to the President of the United States about one of his close relatives. Do you seriously think that in this situation a lowly nurse would say "Sorry Mr President but I cannot tell you because it is confidential" instead of saying that the patient had a good night and was now sleeping. I rather think not.

_________________________Many a child has been spoiled because you can't spank a Grandma!